ObjectiveTo compare the treatment effects of periodontal endoscope-assisted and traditional subgingival scaling on residual pockets.
MethodsA total of 13 patients with periodontitis from Dept. of Periodontics, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University were recruited. After 4-6 weeks of initial treatment, the residual pockets with a probing depth (PD) of ≥4 mm and attachment loss (AL) of ≥4 mm and bleeding on probing were examined with traditional (control group) and periodontal endoscope-assisted subgingival scaling (endoscopy group) in a randomly controlled split-mouth design. At baseline and 6 weeks and 3 months after treatment, plaque index (PLI), PD, AL, and bleeding index (BI) were measured. Differences in these clinical parameters within and between groups and patient-reported outcomes were compared.
ResultsA total of the 694 sites of 251 teeth were included in this trial. Both groups showed significant improvement in each periodontal parameters 6 weeks and 3 months after treatment (P<0 .001). for sites in a single-rooted tooth, sites with pd≥5 mm, and sites without vertical alveolar bone resorption and furcation involvement, the pd in endoscopy group was significantly lower than that in the control group at 6 weeks and 3 months after treatment (P<0 .05).
ConclusionPeriodontal endoscope-assisted subgingival scaling resulted in better effects than traditional subgingival scaling when the residual pockets were in a single-rooted tooth, with a PD of ≥5 mm but without vertical alveolar bone resorption and furcation involvement.
